Posted
by
CmdrTaco
on Wednesday September 27, 2006 @09:30AM
from the that-kinda-blew-my-mind dept.

morpheus83 writes "Sharp Corporation and Sharp Laboratories of Europe, Ltd. (SLE) have developed the Triple Directional Viewing LCD, a display that controls the viewing angle so that the display can show different images from the left, right, and center simultaneously. Using proprietary parallax barrier on a standard TFT LCD, the screen splits light in three directions — left, right, and center — and displays three separate images on the same screen at the same time. So connect three computers to the LCD and from the center you see Windows, Linux from the left and MacOS from the right."

The problem is that the thresholds would be so small -- fractions of a degree -- that you'd have to remain perfectly still and at a specific distance for it to work. (Alternatively, some sort of camera could track your position and adjust the output accordingly, but that doesn't simplify things any from a development standpoint.) The most convenient way to do stereoscopic vision from a technology standpoint is with goggles to present a different image to each eye, however users have shunned such devices,

There is a cheaper alternative to implementing this that I saw a few years ago. Using customized video card drivers and a CRT, you wore a pair of polarizing glasses. The screen would alternate left/right frames and the glasses would block out one eye or the other. It gave a true 3D effect.

For all those airline passengers who are sick of being shoulder-surfed on the plane, a little goatse on either side of you will make sure nobody reads the document you're trying to type ever again. In fact, you may just get the big sweaty guy next to you to move to another seat, giving you room to stretch out a bit.

This is all very fancy, but wont viewing from sides reduce the surface amount you are watching? A 1024x768 from front wont be the same at 45 degree angle - loss of resolution - and compressed faces/picture etc.? How is that solved?

According to Sharp's PR [newlaunches.com], one possible use is as a dashboard display in your car:

So while driving you can see the GPS navigation your kid at the backseat can enjoy Ace Combat on his PS2 while your wife in the passenger seat checks out tourist sites and restaurants all in full-screen view.

That makes a certain amount of sense to me; with viewers essentially strapped in place, you can make sure everybody sees exactly the perspective they're supposed to. Also, in those circumstances, you aren't going to demand especially high resolution--as long as you can make out the information presented, you're OK. (Admittedly, the kid in the backseat playing on his PS2 might want better resolution, but that's his problem. In my day, if we wanted to play PS2, we had to actually get out of our car and walk inside.)

They also mention the possibility of using it for displaying multiple ads in public, so that the ad you see varies depending on whether you are coming ("You're just a few feet away from Joe's Cafe!") or going ("Turn around! You just missed the best restaurant in town!").

Depending on the relative price of the thing, you could also use it to have 3 monitors by placing 2 mirrors instead of actually buying 3 monitors. Assuming one of these could be cheaper than 3 normal monitors, you place it in front of you, then place an attacheable mirror at each side, and bang! 3-head fraging!!;)

And getting the system to render the left and right views mirror-imaged so they come out correctly in the attached mirrors is just a software problem.

Actually, I'd be surprised if they didn't already sell privacy barriers for laptops that double as screen protectors when the laptop is closed, with a bonus panel for the top to cut down on glare from overhead lighting. The closest I've found is this laptop hood [dpreview.com] (scroll down) that folds like those collapsible windshield sunscreens.

You know, if they made them in yellow, you'd look like you're about to be eaten by a Pac-Man.

(The ones for camera LCD screens will make you look like you're pointing it the wrong way.)

well, for a laptop, cheaper would not be my key, the space savings.IE you have a 15" screen, a 15" mirror. It collapses down to a 15" form factor for transport, but you have a 30" (ok well 15" + 15*sin(45) = 26") widescreen monitor.(or just use a 17" mirror.)

but your viewpoint would have to be absolultly fixed in relation to the computer for the mirrored screen to be affective.

I didn't read the article, but It wasn't such a brilliant idea anyway.. If I could think of it 2 seconds after reading a summary on/. I guess it's normal that Sharp engineers would have come up with it long time ago before the thing was even implemented =P

According to Sharp's PR [newlaunches.com], one possible use is as a dashboard display in your car:

So while driving you can see the GPS navigation your kid at the backseat can enjoy Ace Combat on his PS2 while your wife in the passenger seat checks out tourist sites and restaurants all in full-screen view.

Or you could use it for the instrument cluster itself!

"Honey, aren't we driving kinda fast?""No Dear, as you can see from the speedometer, we're only going 65."

Imagine a the face of a building on a street (top down): ___,,,,____||||___

The,,,, is the display and the |||| is the restaurant. If you were walking left (<-) past the restaurant then it would say you missed it. If you were walking right (->) it would tell you that you're walking towards it. You just kinda have to think about it to get it.

This is all very fancy, but wont viewing from sides reduce the surface amount you are watching?

You can easily have 5 people watching the same screen without worrying about perspective. I'm more worried about the amount of pixels. To make 3 pictures, only 1/3 of the pixels will be used in each picture. You'll need a killer resolution to make 3 nice pictures this way.

you pretty much got my main thoughts right there. What worries me is the same problem as with the cerial box cards - there is some bleedover of the image from off angels. Would the same thing happen here? I can just see all the posters here who suggested goatse doing that, and then having the image of goatse subconciously burned into their mind because there is a very minor image bleed of it...

There's no bleed. I've seen the 2 view versions, and they're fine. Thinking about the technology there's no reason to think there would be bleed (assuming you're sat in the correct place), since you've effectively got an LCD grill which is presumably capable of being just as dark as the LCD's used to make black normally. In fact, since they're not expected to be anything other than black or white, they might actually be better at it.

How about digital art? A store front could have a large LCD display, showing the same models/actors doing X in different seasons to showcase a new season lineup of clothing. As you walk by, you see them go from playing in the sun, to shivering in the cold, to playing in the cold in their new down jackets. That would be pretty cool.

Or billboards that do the same trick, as you drive past them the ad changes. Now you can rent out billboard space to more than one advertiser.

"So while driving you can see the GPS navigation your kid at the backseat can enjoy Ace Combat on his PS2 while your wife in the passenger seat checks out tourist sites and restaurants all in full-screen view."In that specific circumstance, it makes a great deal of sense as you have limited space, predictable viewing locations and a fairly small number of reasonable applications, few of which require full UXGA resolution and practically none of which require the full refresh available. When gfx hardware rou

You wouldn't get that much of a refresh rate drop. The GPS will use no graphics power, the DVD is pretty light going, leaving most of the power for the game. I suspect you'd still pretty much hit the 60Hz refresh a lot of LCD screens are limited to anyway.

That's what I meant about Seconds-Per-Frame as opposed to Frames-Per-Second with GPS. If that refreshed once ever three seconds, it would probably go without notice. Hell, most of the OEM installs flip to a static screensaver after a 15s or so while driving, since even watching a moving map is of questionable safety, thus effectively dropping the necessary refresh on that panel to zero.

This is great, but unless you want to have your computer emulate three, you're using three computers/other video sources to display the image. do you really want three people crowding around an LCD, each with their own keyboard, mouse, etc.? And what about brightness, contrast, color, etc.? Does it display different versions of that?

I think everyone is missing the point assuming that the LCD would be used as a computer monitor, displaying computer tasks. More likely it would be used as a television, where Dad watches football from the recliner while Little Timmy watches the latest Pixar flick from the couch. (Wireless headphones required, of course.

I personally can't imagine that there is a huge need for this, but for those people who want that sort of thing, it would beat the hell out of Picture in Picture. . .

do you really want three people crowding around an LCD, each with their own keyboard, mouse, etc.?

As if cubicles aren't small enough, now PHB's can gather six workers on a hex shaped table (three to a side) where each user shares the screen with two others. The only perceivable wall dividing anything now would be the one splitting the two halves of the hexagon.

You know, as a corporate drone, I was thinking the same thing. And while I'm sure you're trying to make a joke (and a good one), the truth is I'm quite certain that many managers and companies are thinking the very same idea. The idea that you can cram more production into less space is always desireable (from a management standpoint, mind you...)

So if this tech really does take off, I would not be surprised to see myself and others working in a "hexicle" soon enough... (sadly)

This thing would be great for multiplayer gaming on consoles. The days of sitting 4 inches from the TV so you can make out what's happening in your quarter of the split-screen would be well and truly over. This seems like the most useful application to me (now maybe we can convince Rare to finally do a decent sequel to Goldeneye)

I played with a Sharp 3D laptop last summer (http://www.sharp3d.com/ [sharp3d.com]), and it was cool but it caused a lot of eyestrain, not to mention halving the usable resolution. This sounds like almost the same technology, and I imagine it won't be any easier on the eyes.

Having different computers for each image was the submitters idea. It does not have to be the whole point of it.

I can think of several uses:1) If you use only 2 of the images and change the angles, each eye could be getting a different image. Instant 3D. Nice.2) This could be a first step if in later generations you can get more images. Imagine actually being able to look around things on your screen without having to manipulate the object with a mouse and keyboard.

1) If you use only 2 of the images and change the angles, each eye could be getting a different image. Instant 3D. Nice.

Ugh. Not really nice. For 3D to work you need two images. There is a dividing line in space between the two images. In order for each eye to see a different image, that dividing line must fall between your eyes. You now have only an inch or so of allowable lateral head movement. I challenge you so sit at your desk without moving your head more than an inch left or right for any significan

I would point out- you all missed the OBVIOUS applicationmy car has a rear dvd player, with wireless headphones for the kids

imagine if they could watch their own programs-- their angle of view/location in the back seatis vey quantifiable (if they aren't killing each other)and if there is a third person in the middle-- voila!

"So while driving you can see the GPS navigation your kid at the backseat can enjoy Ace Combat on his PS2 while your wife in the passenger seat checks out tourist sites and restaurants all in full-screen view. Sharp Triple Directional Viewing LCD is also ideal for multipurpose signs in public."

Oh sure, put MacOS on the right. This is a blatant attack on Mac users by Windows users to associate them with politics that many aren't familiar with. Come on everyone knows Mac users are liberal emo hippies. This is just insulting!

Come on everyone knows Mac users are liberal emo hippiesNo, I don't think it has to do with the users, but the platform itself. Obviously Linux should be on the left because it is "free" and not controlled by anyone.

MacOS should be on the right - it reflects a singular vision (of Steve Jobs). Although many people at Apple work on MacOS X, I have it on good authority that Steve makes all the final calls himself on how it should look/work. (And frankly, I can't think of a better real world example of Plato's

I may be out of touch with Fedora but my unbuntu system has a little drop down where I can chose the resolution from and it switches automaticly and asks if everything looks alright. Redhat really is going down the tubes quickly. Hopefully Suse and Unbuntu and fill the gap.

Actually, it makes sense to put Windows on the left. The term "sinister", though originally a simple reference to the "left-hand-side", now has an evil connotation thanks to the unfavorability of being left-handed or being on the left side. Windows is thus right at home on the left hand side.

I'm shocked no-one has mentioned this yet. It's useful for ads. As you walk past an LCD your angle changes, thus exposing you to three distinct moving pictures. People are drawn to moving pictures - we're psychologically hard-wired for it. I suspect we will see these in the entrance to stores, at eye-level, because as we walk past the store, we will be drawn to the changing images and moving patterns. It's 10 seconds of attention that wasn't there before.

Imagine walking past a video-game store. As you walk past an LCD advertisement you see three different video games depending on your angle. Two of which may not be interesting. But that third, may. All done with one screen, saving money.

The compactness of one video-screen emphasizes the efficiency. Instead of having to avert our eyes to see another image we focus on the single screen, thus avoiding a clutter of LCD's, which has the school-of-fish impact, where we can't focus on any of them.

It seems pretty obvious to me that that is exactly what this device is designed for. The other uses that people have come up with are great in theory, but the only practical use that I can see for this is for advertising. That and it's neat to show off at trade shows.

Just seeing this article, and knowing how a LCD display does have a precise vertical pixel alignment and spacing - leads me to believe this whole thing is nothing more than placing a lenticular plastic lens of appropriate interstripe spacing on top of the LCD, thus yielding three low-resolution displays instead of one higher resolution displays.

Disclaimer: I worked at SLE, but no longer work there.

I worked opposite these guys for a year, and saw some of the early tech demos (mid-2005). The technology

Picture this technology on a screen that's wrapped around the outside of a cylinder. You could have an information kiosk that has a different image for every person that's standing around it. If the images were that of a virtual tour guide, the guide could point things out in 360 degrees, yet it would still be tailored for each person looking at the screen.

I was suggesting that, with the technology expanding, not just the prototype, a single 3D screen could have many more applications when shaped differently. I'm sure the number of viewing angles could be increased. At that point, having 10+ screens would take significantly more space. You're still limiting yourself to three viewing angles.Besides, "cheaper" alternatives can always be the excuse when a technology is in its infancy (no doubt, someone in this thread has already suggested a KVM switchbox as

Hang on.. the lay out is all wrong. I thought that Linux was ultra left wing (bunch of no good commies trying to subvert the place), OS-X was just plain ol' left wing (long haired weirdos, but at least they *sell* their software) and Windows was Right Wing (Where do you want your goverment to go to today?)

Of course, it won't be long before a researcher uses this technology to create a *miniscule* parallax of a few degrees, each displaying the information your eyes would need to form a three-dimensional image. The monitor could be calibrated for the distance you typically sit away from the monitor, and replicate what your eyes already do: glean 3D information from the difference in each eye's POV.

This already exists; the predecessor to this technology in TFA was a display that showed two images, one to each eye. I've never used it but according to some other comments from people who have, it was rather low resolution and caused a lot of eyestrain.Makes sense, seeing as how with that kind of parallax, you'd need to keep your nose basically right along the midline axis of the screen; if you got even a few degrees off, you'd be seeing just the image designed for one eye (and at half the normal resoluti

It's clearly intended for ultra extreme programming: one wide desk and three keyboards. The programmers on the left and right write the code and the person in the center works on continous merges of the best ideas. A fourth back seat drivers continuously runs from left to right giving directions and asking why they aren't just checking the UML.

Work on the left side to throw off your boss, goat porn on the right side to throw off your co-workers, and alt.fan.star-trek.wesley-crusher.furry.erotica on the centre where nobody else will ever see it.

So connect three computers to the LCD and from the center you see Windows, Linux from the left and MacOS from the right.

Yeah, because we'd all like to use our computers like if we were watching the screen of the computer next to us.

Besides, I think everyone would prefer to have huge display [digitaltigers.com] for a single computer rather than three computer with a single display. And with an intel Mac, you already can run OS X, Linux and Windows on the same computer.

Presentations: Your audience (on left and center) sees a full screen Keynote presentation. Your angle shows you the presenter notes, slide navigation, and a thumbnail of the "full screen" that they are seeing. Not great, but for audiences in a boardroom or cubicle, it'd be an improvement.Differing subtitles: A German presentation offers viewers who may benefit from French subtitles to sit to the left, and English subtitles to sit on the right. Perhaps a marketing presentation gets a similar treatment with t

A great use for this would be 3 players all playing the same game (say, GoldenEye). Rather than split the main screen into almost useless subscreens, sit around this and all play together. Now what game console manufacturer will be clever enough to support this with their console first?

If the difference in angle is such that each eye could receive a different image, than this technology could be used to implement a simple 3D display. I've heard that there are already some simple 3d displays. Does anyone know if this technology would be better or worse than that that already exists.

While it would require more than 3 angles I can see this technology having an application in product modeling displays.

There are a number of ways to build a 360 view of a product out of still photos, but they are all intended to be viewed by one person sitting in front of a screen. With more viewing angles (and monitors) a similar display could be made that in intended for multiple viewers who are simply walking around.

I'm not sure what the application for that might be, but I'm just the photographer.

FTA: "So while driving you can see the GPS navigation your kid at the backseat can enjoy Ace Combat on his PS2 while your wife in the passenger seat checks out tourist sites and restaurants all in full-screen view. "

3 screens would take up more space. Now if you had people sitting beside each other and they each had one of those screens then everyone could have 3 desktops. I look at the screen on my left and I see one of my desktops. The person on my left looks at my screen and sees one of their desktops.

Might take a bit of getting used to and the kind of firms that would want everyone using 3 screens probably also want very high quality. It would save a lot of space.